The Sun. — London, England, 1838-03-22 00:00:00

MAILS. Arrived. Due Arrived. Due. I) America.......... 1 2 Fraac,.... 1 Brazil ......—.... 0 0 Guern. Jens's! 0 I 0 Buenos Ayrel.. 0 0 fiaml)urg ~‘ 0 0 Cartbagena..., -. 0 0 kiollatra ...... I I . 0 0 Jamaica 0 1 Flanders 0 0 Leeward Islands Arrived. bu 7 51.4:'3... 0 0 Mexico.. 0 Ostend.. ...... 0 5weden.........A. I Watet - foht 0 HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO MORROW. !'orning n minutes after 01 Evening .21 minutes after U OTlCE.—Further OPENING of the LON- DON and BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY, from London to Denbigh Hall, and from Birmingham to Ragby. On Monday, the 9th of April, the Railway will be opened fcr the conveyance of Passengers and Parcels, between London sod Birmingham and the intermediate places. The Fare by First Class Coaches, or Inside Places, for the whole distance, 30s. second Class Coaches, or Outside Places, ditto, ditto, 205., and proportion for the intermediate distances. These Fares will include every charge, the Porters, Guards, and Coachman, being prohibited from receiving any gratu:ty, The Arriv a l s an d D epar t ures w ill b e so arrange d t h a t P assengers will have the opportunity of making the journey between London and Liverpool, or Manchester, conveniently in one day, with ample time for refreshment at Birmingham. Early notice will be given of the times of departure of the Trains, with further particulars. By Order 11. CREED, }Secretaries. C. R. MOORSOM, March 21, 1838. TO CORRESPONDENTS. We are obliged to " Mark Justitia :" his motives arc good;—indeed much better than his poetry. The publication of Tux StN NEWSPAPER commenced this (lay at 30 minutes past Three o' Clock. WITH WHICH g 4 THE TRUE SUN" IS NOW INCORPORATED. LONDON : THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 22, 1838. Our curiosity as to the Standard's defence has not been gratified. Our Contemporary supplicates for a few days' grace, and a few days' grace the public will give it. In the mean time some events of infinite importance compared to the character of the Standard will arise, and this pecadillo, like other pecadillos, will be forgotten by all, ex cept the select few, who may have felt themselves insulted by being dragged before the public with the Standard's hook in their nostrils, or who may for the moment have trembled lest the charm of delusion should have been broken. In the mean time, too, the great ingenuity of the Standard, which nobody doubts, will be exercised, and as good a case made out as an accomplished advocate can frame. We shall do our Contemporary the justice to in sert his vindication, and charitably draw his attention to some points, which he will have to establish. The Stan dard says : We have elsewhere inserted a correspondence between the Earl of Winchilsea and Mr. O'Connell, on the subject of a supposed extract from the evidence of the latter before one of the Committees of 18.33, in which correspondence the cha racter of the Standard is involved. The Earl of Winchilsea states correctly that the extract in question appeared in our Journal of February 5, 1833, and that it is not borne out by the officially published reports. We may be forgiven if we cannot at the moment lay our bands upon the authority from which we quoted a passage more than five years ago ; but knowing that we have ever been inca pable of fabrication, and that we always exercise a conscien tious care in considering our authority, before making a quotation, we are perfectly confident that we shall be able to justify our conduct in giving the extract in question. This is not the first occasisn upon which we have had to request the patience of our readers in such a matter ; but we have some pride in saying, that if we fail to justify ourselves in this affair, it will be the first instanee of such a failure on onr part. In the present position of the question it would be unbecom ing in us to say one word as to the probable authenticity or probable spuriousness of the extract. We may be, however, per mitted to remark, that as the quotation imputes no opinion to Atr. O'Connell, of which, in the abstract, any man need be ashamed, the date of its appearance in the Standard ( Feb. 5, 1833), when Mr. 0' Oonnell had not yet either spoken or voted otherwise than in strict conformity with all the opinions imputed to him—no Church question having thge, been raised in Parliament—demonstrates that no hostility to Mr. O'Con nell, or unworthy motive of any kind, can be fairly surmised as nrompting us to deviate from the good faith which it has been our anxious desire to observe. Once again, we submit that we arc tntiticd to a few days' delay to account for a quotation made more than five years ago. Perhaps some Correspondent will assist our research, by pointing out the version of the Parliamentary evidence from which the extract (annexed to the correspondence) has been taken. Of this vindication the Chronicle remarks : With all deference to our Contemporary, the authority from which he quoted was the evi fence of Mr. O' Connell itself, and as the evidence does not bear out the quotation, the conscientious care exercised in this case is not very intelligible. Supposing he succeed in tracing the extract, purporting to be Mr. O'Connell's evidence, to some Orange journal of Ireland, this, though it would dispose of the fabrication, would not con stitute a proof of conscientious care, when the reports of the evidence themselves were the obvious source to which he ought to have resorted. Under such circumstances our con temporary must admit that his defence is hardly satisfactory. This directs the attention of the Standard to one im portant matter. It will have to produce that evidence given by Mr. O'CossteLL, which bears out, contrary to what the Earl of WINCHILSEA asserts, the opinions attri buted to Mr. O'CONNELL by the Standard. The Noble Earl says " I have discovered that the extracts of the evidence, re ported to have been given ly you (Mr. O'Connell) before the Parliamentary Committee in 1825 were inserted in the Standard newspaper, of the sth of February, 1833, accom panying the leading article of that. day." The Standard then must produce those portions of Mr. O'CONNELL'S evidence, given before the Parliamentary Committee in 1825, which it inserted as an extract in its own leader, and nothing else will suffice to prove its innocence. Mr. O'CONNELL denies the words attributed to him. Lord WLNCHILSEA says the evidence given by Mr. O'CostteeLL before either Committee bears no such cor_ struction ; and the Standard must produce that particular and express edition of the reports of the Committees which it quoted. It will not do, as the Chronicle ingeni ously suggests, to bring forward—if it can be found—some Orange journal of Ireland as a scape-goat for the evidence inserted in the Standard leader, which Lord WINCIIILSEA quoted on the authority of his own ultra-pious and ultra- Protestant journal, and upon no other. If the extracts quoted from the evidence were taken by the Standard from another paper, it is plain that it led its poor dupes to believe that they rested on its own authority. In the article we have above quoted from the Standard, our Contemporary says that. the " extract imputes no opinions to Mr. O'CONNELL of which in the abstract any man need be as'lamed." Now Mr. O'CONNELL is a Catholic, and he had been before 1833 labouring a number of years to procure Catholic Emancipation. The extract, however, says that he recommended the absolute aboli tion of the 40s. freeholders, for the purpose of securing the Established religion in Ireland ; and that no concession should be made to the Catholics unless the Establishment in Ireland be rendered inviolable. Lord WINCHIGSZA has quoted these recommendations of Mr, O'CONNELL on dif ferent necasigns in the House of Peers ; they have fre quently gone the round of the Press, and have justified the Tory Journals in denouncing Mr. O'CoNN ELL as a wilful, designing, docxiving, perjured man. Yet the Standard says that the opinions on which such a charge is founded Are nothing to be ashamed of. The object of Mr. O'CoNtittes life has been to throw off that bond age or the Established Church, which the -Standard represents him as recommending should be continued, awl that even the 40s. freeholders should be dis franchised to secure it, and yet, in that, there is nothing for Mr. O'CONNELL to be ashamed of. If the Standard's opinions of what is true resemble its opinions of what is shameful, the ingenuity of its defence may be anticipated. We give our Contemporary the grace ha demands before expressing. our final opinion, and look with some impatience for the ingenious article which Orange Journals and useful Correspondents will enable our Contemporary to write. One of the great boasts of the Tories is that their politi cal conduct is all resolution and energy, while that of the Whigs is all vacillation and feebleness. The Tories, if we believe them, are all men of a strong will and comprehen sive mind, who impress, at least when in office, their own genius on the age. They never deviate into weakness, or 1.:1 ,. fell short of the mark. They do not follow society, but _lb i e'l' l kikat it along, whithersoever they will, at their fAii iiictint chariot-wheels. BONAPARTE was content to - iltlYd \if I , . / -t ,t) ae . , tk . 1 431, himself the child of the Revolution, and to C iii., e .. ;‘,. - _ - _FI : , .w .. w i lje tness on that fearful tempest of slavish pas- - ific--7: — 14A \-/ 'c,..- .z . 4 1,... .". " .• / ,,/: 4 , )., AY ~. _ sion. But our Tories are infinltery eeater than BONA PARTE, and men and 'things must submit to their iron rule. The Corn Laws, pressing us down to. hunger, area pure Specimen of Toryism. Though sovise Nitb l o Voted for them, and some Toe.y t ern t l'elii "e n voted against them, the resolut 3 en -..,f 'the landed gentlemen legally to plunder ,the bread-eaters after their own fashion—their 'stern 'ekital 'of the prayers of the 1.:ople for 'Cheap lieea4 l / 2 ", n, - ,1 plenty of it—their fierce resolution ti -- .) resist every change in the Corn Laws-i.-ther pitiless disregard of starviug multitudes, FO long as their law be upheld—are all Ertnuinc Toryism. The Corn Laws are in fact the veryl essence of that Tory scheme of Governmatt, which is comer; - sed in one maxim. " 'Tit ' people arc created for their' rulers, and must rerish to promote the smallest conve niency of their masters." The Tories have in practice cs , rayed to realise even a worse idolatry than that of the poe _ for his mistress, and have required that nations should withe and die for their paltriest advantage. On Tuesday nigh ilthe system was again exhibited in its true colours, an Lord Cllasmos, who stands wholly excused of Whig re lenting, or Whig vacillation, on the subject of the Corn laws, with other landed gentlemen, stoutly opposed a poor measure for allowing foreign grown corn to be even manu factured in England under the lock of the Customs, so that all the flour or bread made from it might be re-exported. The motion for a Committee was carried, and our millers may possibly be indulged, though it is not yet certain, with the privilege of grinding foreign wheat, but the people must not eat it. One of the landed gentlemen, Sir E. KNATCIIBULL, while he denied the chat ge of selfishness, justly made against his whole tribe, expressly admitted that he thought no harm could en,ue if none of this corn were eaten by the people. He voted, however, against the motion. The Scripture says, " Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn ;" but our landowners, treating their coun trymen worse than the Israelites treated their oxen, expressly enact that the millers shall be muzzled, and shall not eat one atom of that corn which they prepare for food. On the condition alone, that the law be so jealously guarded, that such vigilant and expensive watchfulness be established, at the public expense, that none of this corn shall be consumed by the people, some of the landlords hint that they may relent. This is called upright, honour able legislation in this Christian country, and thus to muzzle the people by a Custom-house lock is called by the land owners the public welfare. Reason as they may, argue as they will, mystify as they can, they never will persuade one generation that it is for their advantage to be half starved, that another generation may perhaps be abundantly fed on corn wholly and exclusively grown on the ground monopo lized by CHANDOS, KNATCHBULL, and the rest of the land owning law-makers. We have received a Report of a Select Committee of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada, dated the 18th ult., on the state of that Province ; and embracing an his torical epitome of the origin, progress, extent, and ex tinction of the late rebellion. It is one of those official documents, more remarkable for great length and extreme wordiness, than for the trust-worthiness of alleged facts, and the sound statesmanship of recommendatory sugges tions. As we are morally certain that it would not find a reader among a thousand of our subscribers, we shall de vote our columns to something more useful than an attempt to give currency to a mass of silly, contradictory, imperti nent rubbish. Mr. WARD brings on a motion to-night in the House of Commons, in which the interests of the British residents in India are deeply involved. The object of the motion is the appointment of a Select Committee to enquire into the grounds of a petition from the inhabitants of Calcutta and others, against an Act of the Legislative Council passed in 1836, by which they consider themselves greatly aggrieved. This Act took away the right of appeal to the Supreme Civil Court at the different Presi dencies, and also the right of exemption by reason of descent which Europeans enjoyed from the jurisdiction of the native Courts, the judges of which are often very cor rupt, as well as ignorant of law. The hardship imposed on the European inhabitants by being subjected to such tribu nals may be easily conceived to be severe, and in many cases so intolerable as to drive them from India. No reason able person can object to their complaints being at least taken into consideration by the Legislature. We therefore antici pate that Mr. WARD'S motion will meet with no opposifol. The sacred mantle of Sir ANDREW AGNEW appears to have descended on the shoulders of his successor, Mr. PLUMPTRE, who last night moved the second reading of his Sunday-starvation Bill, on the whimsical plea that it was a measure for the prevention of the unrighteous dese cration of the Sabbath. The Hon. Gentleman observed that he was quite aware that he should be made a martyr of, for venturing to legislate upon such a theme ; but not even the recollection of St. LAWRENCE and his gridiron, or, to quote his own words, " No taunts nor sneers should deter him from pursuing the course on this subject which he should think right." Mr. PLU3IPTRE'S courage is more to be commended than his discretion, or he would not hare ven tured on the perilous task of standing godfather to a Bill which is. nearly, if not quite, as stringent as its predecessors, and cann .t fail to cover its sponsor with ridicule. Sir AN DREW'S Sabbath restriction Acts, were chiefly remarkable for the svre2ping anathemas which they hurled against old women and their apple-stalls, whom they knocked down with as little ceremony as if they had been nine-pins ; the present Bill directs the thunder of its eloquence chiefly against " bakers, and the keepers of ale-houses and beer shops." These are the infidels, quoth Mr. PLUMPTRE, who are "the chief violators of the Sabbath." The hotal and club-house keepers at the West-end, are quite innocent in this respect. They never violate the grave propriety of the Lord's Day! Their establishments are always rigidly kept shut. No aristocratic carriages are ever seen standing at their doors ; no cooks working in a state of professional perspiration in their kitchens ; ask for the landlord, he is at church ; for the waiter, he is following the same righteous example ; for the chambermaid, she is on her knees at the New Jerusalem. Never were such pious, well conducted establishments It is perfect madness to legislate against paragons of sanctity like these ; no, no ; it, is against the athiestical bakers and ale-house keepers that we must legislate. These are the real Sab bath violators—wretches who, in spite of law and Gospel that decree, or ought to decree otherwise, think it no sin to bake the poor man's leg of mutton, or supply him with a draught of cool ale, when he may be fatigued with a hot and dusty walk along the high-roads on a Sunday. Coerce all such profane, uncivilized heathens, quoth Mr. PLUMPTRE ; and accordingly it is seriously proposed, in a Reformed House of Commcns, by a majority of seventy-one, to consider the question of their coercion ! Now we beg to enter our most earnest protest against absurd, partial legislation like this. Why shut the door of the baker's oven, and leave the door of the club-house kitchen open ? Why punish the poor ale-house keeper, and permit the rich landlord of the west-end hotel to do what he will with impunity ? Let not the vengeance of the law fall only on Lazaitus's mug of beer, and baked leg of mutton ; but let it visit also DIVES'S sparkling champagne and steaming calipash. We have no patience with these crude, crazy, partial Sab bath Bills. They engender a world of cant, under the pre tence of furthering the interests of devotion. We shall not lose sight of this subject. Many and important as have been the changes in Spain since the commencement of the Carlist rebellion, they have in no way affected the policy which it was the duty of England and France to have adopted, the instant it was ascertained that the QUEEN'S Government was not in a condition, unaided, to crush the insurrection in the Basques. The intervention proclaimed by M. TRIERS, three years ago, as necessary to the pacification of the Peninsula, is only more imperatively called for by the events that have since taken place. Neither the proclamation of the Con stitution, nor the banishment and recal of the framers and champions of the Estatato Real, has had that in fluence upon the principle involved in the question of intervention as to affect, in the slightest degree, the engagements entered into by the Powers who signed the Quadruple Treaty. The war in Spain is still a deadly struggle in which we see usurpation, despotism, and super stition arrayed against liberty civil and religious, social order, and the solemnly recorded judgment of the Cortes of the kingdom. Without throwing aside all regard for the faith of treaties, it is morally impossible that we should longer continue indolent and uninterested spectators of a strife which threatens to become interminable, unless we a• opt really decisive measures to put an end to it, We have had sufficient eraperience of foIIT !;!iftrtt ti 4. by lnnzer aeitlons of the Spanish Liberals. .They evidently cannot de more than keep iheir. ground against the Carlists, supported indic-ectly; as the til•'el by Fhb gold of the Great Northern Powers. %kith a weak and tottering Cabinet, an exhausted Treasury, incompetent Generals, and an unpaid and tits coot cntsd army, Spain cannot, unaided, of :et her own de liverancO: As our rOlitical ilelations witli Spain are likely to form, pursuant to notice, the subject of a debate in the House of Commons on Tuesday next, we beg to direct the atten tion of such as desire to see this question fairly stated in all its bearings, to the S:quel of the Policy ( ! f Eligknd to wards Spain, published by the Messrs. IttuGwaY, and which has just reached a second edition. The author of this pamphlet, after a careful examination of all the facts stated by every party with regard to Spain—alter a minute review of all the incidents that have taken place in the Peninsula, since the death of FERDINAND V I 1.--arrives at the conclusion which M. TILLERS did three years ago— namely, that without foreign intervention the pacification of the Peninsula is hopeless. We are, and have always been, of the same opinion. The Sun was the first Journal in London, as the Debuts was the first in Paris, to intreat the Governments of France and England to send a force into Spain powerful enough to put an end to the civil war in the course of a single campaign. Our suggestion was assailed as preposterous by superficial politicians of all parties. The answers of such persons were—" Oh ! the Spaniards are jealous, and will not accept co-operation"—" The Queen's Government only requires a little time to apply the resources at its disposal, and the insurgents will be scattered like chaff before the wind"—" We have nothing to do with other people's quar rels"—" Look at the expense"—and other observations equally sage, and as little to the purpose. Well, what has happened ? Are we gainers by our neutral policy? Are we likely to gain by it, in the event of the Spanish quarrel becoming an European contest, in which we may be called upon to figure as principals ? For a trifling expense we might have given repose to the Peninsula—put an end to the useless effusion of rivers of innocent blood—and at the same time secured to our merchants commercial advan tages more than adequate to remunerate us for such a sa crifice. Perhaps it may not be yet too late to retrieve our errors. Lord ELIOT'S motion will afford the Government an opportunity of reconsidering the evils of which the Spanish non-intervention system of England and France has been so fertile a source, which we trust will not be thrown away upon the Noble Foreign Secretary. The Middlesex Sages, BEAUMONT, HANSLER, HALS WELL, StarrsoN, ai. Co., agreed, yesterday, so says the report in the Advertiser, to the last seven of the resolutions touching sellers and drinkers of Beer, and are to discuss them on a future day. It has generally bean thought that legislating by proxy—that is giving a vote before hand, and deputing somebody else to hear the arguments—is not a rem irkably natural method of transacting business; but the Magistrates surpass the Peers as they ought in absurdity, lest their Lordships should have no foil, and adopt resolutions before discussing them. We live, however, in an age of improvement, and no doubt the gentlemen who meet at Clerkenwell have discovered some steam-engine method of law-making, which will enable them to beat LYCURGUS, SOLON, and Mos Es. The first resolution— that keeping open public-houses for the sale ofintoxicating liquors encouragos drunkenness, was properly carried—as if more were sold probably less would be drunk—but the second resolution, declaring that the public re quires houses of refreshment, was lost. The Ma gistrates appear to say that the public may get drunk, but must not have refreshment. The third resolution, declaring that the publicans require protection Against swindlers, was rejected; for why should those whose sale of intoxicating liquors encourages drunkenness be pro tected? Worthless men ! wise Magistrates ! may you reign fur ever over the beer-sellers and beer•drinkers of the me tropolis ; so shall there be drunkenness and no refreshment —swindling and no punishment. The French Journals of Monday, which we did not re ceive yesterday, and those of Tuesday, have reached us this morning. Their contents arc unimportant. The struggle of parties has terminated for the present in the Chambers, and out of doors the Ministers are rather popular than otherwise. Nothing is now talked of but the making and expense of railways, which begin to intersect France in every direction. We have advices from Madrid to the Etth inst. which represent the capital as comparatively tranquil. ORAA had given orders for the trial of the Carlist Chief, TALLADA, by a court-marti,d, for the wilful murder of hi s prisoners. The guilt of the accused was so notorious, that his condemnation may be considered as certain. The follow ing is the only news received from the Spanish frontier A letter from Logrono, of the 13th, says :—" A courier from Lodosa informs us, that the Carlists taking advantage of the absence of Leon el Conde, have passed the Ebro with 20 battalions and 19 squadrons. The two divisions of Lo grono and Haro march this moment in the direction of Ter hollia ( Castille), to anticipate the Carlists, and prevent their penetrating into the mountains of Forca, and the province of Burgos. Espartera will take the command of these two divi sions. Lest Don Carlos should profit by this movement to ewer the Asturias, General Latre has received orders to manceuvre towards Villarcayo. The Carlists have been driven to this operation by despair; the provinces cannot afford them subsistence, and they will probably leave but a small garrison at Estella. Unhappily our Generals do not profit by the ar dour of our troops, who wish to fight, but weary them with useless marches and countermarches; but lately they were made to march nineteen leagues in twenty four hours, without any results. It is said that Villareal is in favour again.._ Journal des Debats. FRENCH FUNDS.-PARIS, Marten 19. Five per Cents., 101 f. 95c. 1081. 10c. 105 f. hree per Cents., 801. sc, ICc. Bank Actions, 2660 f. Itente ae Naples, 99f. 45c. 50c. Roman Five per Cents., 102 f. 101%f. Spanish Actives, 211 k %NaA. Spanish Passives, 4% N. Belgian Loan, live per Cents, MN. Belgian Bank, Lll5l. 1,572 f. 50c. 1,470!. Portuguese Loan, Three per Cents. :20N. Haytian Loan, 4001. EXCHANGIi 01 LONDON. One month, paper, 251. 50c. ; money, 25f. 50c Three months, paper, 251. 37k,e.; money, 251. 37Y,c. LAST PRICES. Five per Cents. 108 f. Three per Cents., 801. 15c. Bank Actions, 2,6ti01. Romans, 102. Belgian Loan, 1044. Belgian Bank, 1,470 f. Portuguese Three per Cents., 203 i. Haytian Loan, 4001. Spanish Actives, 21 N. Spanish Passives, 43i. Brussels and German Papers of the latest dates have been received this morning. The latter contain no news. From the former we copy the following important para graph : BRUSSELS, MARen 19.—The Procureur gives the following extract of a letter from the Hague, dated March 16 :—" It is affirmed that his Majesty, King William, has at length deter mined to sign the twenty-four articles; that M. Dedel has re ceived-orders to that effect ; that a communication has been made to the Chamber on the subject, in a secret sitting ; and that some of the Foreign Ministers, the most interested in the question, have been informed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Th i s important news will doubtless soon become public—it is already spread in the well-informed circles ; all proves that it is not an idle rumour, and that the separation of Belgium is going to be at length recognised." DUTCH F UNDS.—AstaTEttout, Nano' 19. Actual Debt, 2,, per Cent. Do do. 5 per Cent. Amort Syndic 4'o par Cent., Do. do. ri , iper Cent Commercial Company, 4% per Cent 18.1% New ditto BELGIAN I. UNDS—flatssus, Ma rum 20. Actual Debt, 2% per Cent. ..................... 54 1 4 Rothschild's Loan, 5 per Cent. .................. Loan of Thirty ........................ Loan of City, IFCI2, 4 per Cent ................... 93% Society of Commerce, 4 Sa per Cent ............. 161% Bank of Belgium, 5 per Cent ..................... 115 National Society —Brussels Papers, March 20, AUSTRIAN FUN'D.S.-111ENNA, Mtacif 12. Five per Cents. Metalliques ............................... 107 Fotsr per Cents. Three per Cents. Bank Shares —4llgemeineZeitung, March 17. Napoleon used to say that often the fate of battles, and even of empires themselves, depends d' un r i en. Suc h i s certainly true. He himself might have lived and died a sub-lieutenant, which he was for six years, if fate had not willed it otherwise. One happy event, or one fort unate di scover y, may cause the world to resound with the name of a private iniividual. We have at present a man WllO3O reputation within a few months has started up, and has burst forth into an asto nishing degree of popularity; he has already, we are told, re fused ten thousand pounds for his name and his secret. We allude to Holloway, of Universal Family Ointment celebrity. We give his address to our readers-13, Broad-street Build ings, City, as those who are afflicted with external diseases, as ulcerated cancer, bad legs, ulcers, wounds, tumours, burns, scalds, or indolent skin diseases, will no doubt find great re lief from his remedy. Most Chemists keep it throughout the kingdom. 444 , , , TETIe a=. SE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.) ssiaLL C).:(44 . a b.—lehhAlie+ , Their Lordshi having • ' heir Am p' day for plying t i ` ; . tOrtani,judesiient in t'sp case of " Sinai,' V. Attwood," long LFrrc ten 04_',1t.4":1 i.he es!'etal'4A "o.th.. ‘9 the oar rin !lie balje :; . , ries of the House of Lords was crowded with most respeciao'e persona; among whom we noticed many of the most eminent iron-masters of Staffordshise. The case came before their Lordships ttnoe appeal horn the decision of Lord Lyndhurst then Lord thief Baron of the Extihequei; rescinding a eon= tract entered lei° between Mr. Attwood slid the British Iroas Corepany, to Outlive Certain iron mines at CorngreaveS, id Staffordshire, ;Os the sum of 550,000/. The Lords in attendance were the Lord Chancellor;,, the Earl of Devon, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord 13rougham, Lord Tin• ford and Lord lenyeit. Shortly after 10 o'cicck, Counsel were called to the liar, When- The E'a , l of DevoN said that it now becanee Ids dlty tH. call the attention of their Lordships to the case of Small v Attwood, a ( ase, he would *el. - tete to say, of the utmost importance, and which in its circumst tnces and details, was foully unlike any that had ever been brought before that House. Before he came to the consideration of the merits of the case, it might be as well to advert to a preliminary part of the decree of the Noble Lord who bad decided the case in the Court below, in which lie had ordered that the costs, which were to be paid by Philip Taylor should be paid for him by Mr. Attwood. He must consider that such a direction was totally against all the proceedings of Courts of Equity, and Mr. Attwood had as great a right to complain of it as all the other parts of the decree. Ile would come now to the main point in the case, and in doing so he trusted their Lordships would readi l y believe that he approached it with much pain and anxiety, when he stated that after complete and mature deliberation, he felt himself bound to take a view of this important question different from that taken by the Noble and Learned Lord, then Lord Chief Baron. Having, however, been one of the three Lords who sat to hear the appeal, and having attended most closely to the able arguments of Counsel at the Bar, he felt bound to offer his opinions, such as they were, to their Lordships. The very full and laborious arguments which bad been addressed to the House, and the great assistance that bad been afforded by the voluminous papers that had been printed, gave to their Lordships an advantage in considering the case which Lord Lyndhurst did not enjoy. Addressing himself to tho appeal in question, his first inquiry was, what were the powers of a Court of Equity to set aside a contract entered into by competent parties on the ground of fraud. The principles upon which a Court of Equity acted were laid down in a case of Edwards and —, decided by Sir Wil liam Grant, and afterwards upon appeal by Lord Eldon. Those principles were, as laid down by those Learned Judges, as well as by the Chief Baron himself, that where a misre presentation of material facts had been given by a person knowing them to be untrue, that in that case an ac tion at law would lie, and a party might come for ward in equity for the purpose of getting rid of a con tract founded on such fraudulent representations. He (Lord Devon) had no doubt that the' principles stated by those eminent judges was the one upon which Courts of Equity would act. Now what was the history of the present case ? Why, that previously to the year 1825, various meetings and discussions had taken place between Mr. Attwood and Mr. Philip Taylor, the agent of the British Iron Company, with a view to the purchasing of the iron works belonging to Mr. Attwood at Corngreaves in Staffordshire. Those discus sions took place verbally, but their result was embodied in certain written representations ; and the first question which :arose, was whether those representations were to be taken as actual facts, or merely as suggestions for the consideration of the parties concerned. In the view which he (Lord Devon) took of the present case, it was not material :to decide that question ; but if it was, in his opinion there was no proof of actual fraud on the part of Mr. Attwood, in the papers which had been handed him. He thought, looking -to those papers, it was impossible to say that a gross fraud had been committed on the part of Mr. Attwood. The Noble Lord, after reading some of the papers, said their Lord ships would observe that at one of the meetings that had taken place, the papers that had been handed in by Mr. Att wood had been considered at very great length, and there could be no doubt whatever that the attention both of the directors and agents of the British Iron Company had been quite alive as to what the property was. From the results of some of the meetings that took place, 'a deputation of Directors was sent down to Corn 'greases to satisfy themselves with respect to the state of m the property. They were not satisfied with the statements of .Mr. Attwood, but actually sent a deputation down to ascer tain the real state of the works before they fulfilled the con tract into which they had entered. Now, the object of that deputation was to be taken from the statements made. Those statements were, that they were to judge for themselves as to the nature of the works, after the inspection of them, and were r 'to &cid° whether the contract should be fulfilled or not. Three of the Directors went to Corngreaves, and they took with them Mr. Phillip Taylor, who must now be taken as one ,of the Company, unaffected by fraud on his part, but as one having an interest in the concern. Another person who was consulted, was a gentleman who had been residing for weeks at Corngreaves. A Mr. Morrison was also ordered to inspect the mineral field. How, therefore, did the case stand with ,respect to evidence? Why, first, with respect to the mineral field, it was stated in the evidence of Mr. Morrison, that hav ing been ordered in 1825, by Mr. Philip Taylor, to make a strict examination into the state of the continuity of coal, he stated that be believed there was some fault in the mine, but altogether his evidence was in favour of Mr. Attwood. Then there was the evidence of Mr. Brunton, who was also sent to examine the mineral field, and he stated that by proper ap plication of capital, an ample return upon fire hundred and fifty thousand pounds might be made. He expressed his opinion also, that no mis-statements, in point of fact, with respect to the mines had been made by Mr. Attwood. The more important point was whether Mr. Attwood, in deliver ing in the representations he had made with respect to Corn greaves, showed such a case of fraud as entitled the Company to be relieved. Why, even if those representations were false, had not the parties taken the greatest pains to ascertain what the real state of the property was ? Parties went out to ex amine the property, and if they had not made that examination properly the fault was their own, and not that of Mr. Att wood. In answer to that observation, it had been said that James and Edwards, two of the persons who had been sent out to examine certain parts of the property, had made a statement with respect to the yields of the furnaces which was not correct. Supposing that even to he so, had not the purchaser ample opportunies of correcting it ? Could parties, therefore, call upon a Court of Equity to set aside a contract entered into under such cir cumstances ? It might be true that the papers sent in by Mr. Attwood contained misrepresentations, but in his view, the papers did not contain any fraudulent misrepresentations. The only thing that could lead to the belief that the papers contained fraudulent misrepresentations, was what was stated by one person, not in the presence of Mr. Att wood, but in answer to a question put to him by other perti( s. Oa the 17th of October the deputation then proceeded to Birmingham, and the queries they sent back to Taylor were extremely minute—they had all their own notes and memo randa by them, but they were not satisfied—they sent a paper to Philip Taylor, calling for further information on very mi nute particulars. The answer of Taylor was that since they had left he had been constantly occupied in examining tho books of Mr. Attwood, and comparing them with his state ments. That was important, as it had been alleged that he was so much occupied with other matters that (he being one of the plaintiffs, and a party about to make the purchase of an estate) he had not time to make the necessary inquiries. Mr. Taylor went on to state that although it might be safe or prudent to estimate the profits on the wholesale calculations of Mr. Attwood, still it was unquestionally proved that the data were favour able. The deputation then went back to London, and made their repert, which stated that, in accordance with the reso lution of the Board of Directors of the British Iron Company, they had examined the books and other documents, and had come to the conclusion that Mr. Attwood had essentially proved that his statement was correct and well founded. After that proceeding on their part the contract went on. There had been some discussion with respect to the words " waiver" and " acquiescence," but the whole course of the proceeding showed that the Company had resolved not to take upon trust any statement made to them, but to examine for themselves. He was fortified in th e view of the case he had taken against the Company, by the fact that the Bill had not been filed for some months after the Company had been in posses sion. Within the first fortnight after possession, the acting partners, or agent, musthave known the accuracy or inaccuracy of the estimates upon which the purchase had proceeded. With respect to the items of dead work and salaries, all of which were ingredients in the price at which iron could be manufactured, it appeared to him (Earl Devon) to be absurd to suppose that any party would rely upon the statements of the vendor, as it must be a matter of calculation which every person conversant with the trade could make. Upon the whole case, then, and without attempting to go through all the particulars, he felt himself bound to come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs in that suit, upon the Bill so framed and so presented to the Court, were not entitled to the relief prayed for. He was not aware that he had omitted to notice any points deserving of importance. He certainly had not willingly omitted any point relied upon by counsel, or established, by any part of the case. They had had the advantage of the most able and eminent Counsel, and he (Earl Devon) need hardly say, that he had applied himself to the examination of the evidence tendered, and he should be ashamed of himself if he had not given to it the utmost c onsideration, and he was quite sure, although differing from his Learned Friend, that he would have condemned him (Earl Devon) if, after having given that attention to it, and brought his mind to that conclusion, he had not honestly stated it. He should now have an opportunity of hearing ethers much better qualified to form an opinion on the case; but if the judgment of the house should be with him, he felt convinced that justice substantially would be done, in conformity with the sound est principles of law, and in reference to time actual state of the case, and the evidence before them. Lord BROUGUA NJ, having heard the statement of the case on part of the appellants at great length, and the outline of the case on behalf of the respondents, felt it necessary to say a few words. The case had been, then, postponed to another 305.. 51011, it having been ascertained that they could not come to a decision in the course of that session. The consequence of that: adjournment was, that his (Lord Brougham's) indisposi tion, which he regretted, not so much on his own account as because it entailed on their Lordships the necessity of re hearing so much of the case again, and of putting the parties to the expence incurred a second time—the consequence was, that his indisposition had prevented him hearing the whole of the case. He would, however, observe, that it would depend upon the iudgment of their Lordships whether he should again have the honour of addressing them or. the case. It might so happen that he would feel himself disqualified from .„ . taking a past in the discussieM, l'e't.rt he hoped their Lordships would not consider, making allowances for ti'l'e prominent part he had taken in the matter, that he had improperly intruded 8n \litir attentien After. a few *Oros irdett the Fowl of Devox in explanation, The Load CIiANCELi:OR said dials censidering the import an, s 0. 4 e eds4C--elhYl oitaret from the dmodr e it r o: in volved, and from the Stsirtility do'c'ernertts Which eiidst be referred to before one could come to a pi had induced him to devote as much time and attention to the case ag It fit aired. Before he called their Lordships' atteritioe to the fedi the grouuds upon which had come to the conclusion lie ateilld pfeeently state, he should first caSll their Lordships' attention to the staff! of the record, and in particular ti; the Way in Which it stood after the amendrngnt. It appeared that ore of the pm-chasers, named Phillip Tay'ior; harl, as, it was alleged, so lent blreeelf to the unjust purposes of Mr. Atteeseod. that.-it was proper for the plaintiffs seeking to be relieved, not oaiv from the contract, but froth the actual oak, to make him e defendant on the re cord. lle entered sot at present iuto the proptir!v of that order, which enabled ties pie;ntiffe to remove Taylor Lot has cosplaintiffship, and make a defendant. He looked at the record only as it stood after its amendment. He found the tpleintiff in a Court of IZtitlitYl charging Phillip Taylor, one of themselves, with havinang so far aoandoneil his duty as an active agent of the Company as to have engaged in matters which would amount to a gross fraud. If that allegation had Teen made out, the record would have been most IR operly framed, and Mr. Att.wood would not have been able to object to it. The allegation was not made out, and the charge of fraud was negatived. Other facts were also attempted to be brought to beer against Taylor, but they had not been proved. Looking at those allegations, he had not a moment's hesitation or doubt in saying that the judgment of the Court belew was entirely right. That deci sion left the record with Taylor, the active agent and co partner of those who made the purchase. If Taylor was ac quitted why should he not be considered a party to those acts? With respect to the practice of insking one of the plaintiffs a defendant, it was not necessary for him now to call their Lord ships' attention to whether that was a proper proceeding in a Court of Equity. To him (the Lord Chancellor) it had al ways appeared that it was a practice never resorted to ex cept for the purposes of injustice—it was borrowing from the Criminal Law one of its most objectionable features. He did not think any case was ever brought before him under such circumstances as that he would think it safe to proceed to an adjudication on the merits, where the plaintiff had pre vented those who were most able to speak to facts on the part of the defendant from proving them. That circumstance alone would have induced him before he sanctioned the judg ment as it stood to have thought it absolutely necessary to have the matter put into such a state that the defendant should have the advantage of proving his case. Entertaining these feelings he had great satisfaction in observing the course their Lordships' House took on the very important case of " De Beavoir v. Rhodes," when his Noble and Learned Friend ( Lord Brougham) was on the Woolsack. Lord BROUGHANI—Lord Eldon and Lord Pluakett agreed to that decision. The Loan CHANCELLOR could not conceive a case in which ho should feel himself less safe in coming to an adjudica tion than where the plaintiff had, under pretence of having security for costs, deprived his opponent of the means of proving his case. Before going into a detail of the allegations in the Bill, he would state what he con sidered to be the real matter in issue between the parties ; and then he would state the course by which he thought it was most likely their Lordships would be able to arrive at a right conclusion, and meet the ends of justice in considering what the matter in issue between the parties was, and how it ought to be decided. Their Lordships were aware that the property in question consisted of property partly leasehold and partly freehold. The Company being desirous of pro curing property of this description, a negotiation was entered into between Mr. Attwood, or his agent, and the Company, or their agents. The plaintiffs alleged—and so far, undoubt edly, the facts proved they were correct—that certain repre sentations were made by Mr. Attwood as to the state of the property, as to the productive powers of the property, and as to certain circumstances material to be considered by those who were to become the purchasers. Those representations in the first instance were verbal, they were afterwards reduced into writing; not by Mr. Attwood, but by Mr. Phillip Taylor,one of the purchasers; and there was evidence that Mr. Attwood, after seeing those papers, and after having seen the statement as it appeared in those papers, he sanctioned the representa tion made upon it, and adopted it as his representation. The negotiation having gone on for a considerable time, till the day elapsed, the Ist of October, on which it ought to have been completed, and there being still some question about the title, the bill alleged the contract was actually at an cud. That did not appear to be the fact. There was certainly some difficulty in going on with it, and a doubt whether it should be prosecuted or not. It ended, according to the evidence, in the Company agreeing to go on with it, provided that was done which formed part of the original contract or undertaking —namely, that those representations, whatever they were, that appeared on the papers should be proved to the satisfaction of the Company to be correct, according to the books and docu. ments in Mr. Attwood's possession. Accordingly a deputation was sent, consisting of twelve members of the Company, and three professional persons ; and the question turned on the course of dealing at the time that deputation went down to Congreaves. What was alleged to be the purpose of that was material, and yet, singularly enough, on the face of the record, that did not seem to him (the Lord Chancellor), to have beers very accurately understood or accurately stated. The object of that deputation, as it appeared to him was, not to receive any new statement, not to receive any new representation, except for the purpose of proving the accuracy of the first representation 'contained in the P. T." papers, and yet the bill exhausted all its vigour against the "D " papers that were produced and left untouched, except so far as it was to be decided from circumstances connected with the "P. T." papers, the question how far the "P. T." papers were proved or not. l'he question was, what the contract between the parties was ? Why, it was, to go on with the contract if the repre sentations in the "P. T." papers were proved. The parties went down, and evidence was brought before them. What passed on that occasion was one of those matters that, from the course adopted by the plaintiffs, remained in doubt, be cause the plaintiffs had incapacitated those two persons who were employed by Mr. Attwood from speaking with any accuracy as to what took place. This was the issue between the parties—the plaintiffs asserting that the " P. T." papers and the " D." papers (that was the original representation, and the papers produced for the purpose of authenticity and proving that representation)—were representations of what actually had taken place within a given time. The defendant, on the other hand, said that that was not the object either of the one representation or the other, but that the object was to exhibit, not what had taken place, but to show those who were to become purchasers what they might fairly cal culate upon as the result of the future working to be derived from the experience of what had taken place before. The course by which it seemed to him most likely to avoid any error in testimony, and to try and test the accuracy of the case made on behalf of the plaintiff and defeadant, was not to rely entirely on what any witness might have said as to what lie had heard pass in conversation, but to refer to svhat he found in writing passing between the plaintiff and their agents, and the defendants or their agents, or, what was still more important, passing between the different members of that Company which the plaintiffs represented. If he found no doubt or difficulty left on his mind as to villa was the real understanding of the parties, not only as to the nature of the representations made or intended to be conveyed by those papers, but as to their acting on that information, and as to what they understood themselves, lie should not think it safe to give any credit to a witness who might be called to state something in conversation inconsistent with the result of such evidence. Before he called their Lordships' atten tion to the written documents, he would notice some allegations in the Bill. Their Lordships would bear in mind what was the representation of one side and the other, with regard to the information intended to be conveyed by those two descriptions of papers; he thought their Lordships would consider this was an important consideration, putting themselves in the situation of the intended purchaser, what was the sort of information they would naturally wish to obtain. The object of the Company must have have been to know whether they were safe in paying so large a sum of money, and to ascertain as far as the nature of the case would permit what were likely to be the fruits of so large a payment. It would not have been satisfactory to the purchaser merely to have been told what had been the result of any one fortnight in any one year. That would not have enabled him to form a guess as to what was likely to be the result of future years under all the changes property of that sort was liable to. He would now state what he considered to be the points in issue, and which would be more or less affected by Cm in vestigation of the documents to which he was about to refer. The points to which he thought it important to put their Lordships in possession of were—first, whether the representations were matter of fact, or whether they we e speculative calculations ; secondly, whether those representa tions, w hatever they might be, were acted on by th e Com pany ; thirdly, whether they were true or false ; and, lastly, whether anything had happened to deprive the Company of the right of insisting upon the inaccuracies of those representations if they were inaccurate. He would then call their Lordship's attention to the P. T. Papers. It was evident that they were partly speculative. There were no furnaces at Congreaves ; yet the calculations we re made, that if six were e rec t e d there, so much metal would be obtained at a certain cost. Then again they stated that there were six furnaces at Dudley Wood Making 360 tons of pig iron for a certain cost ; there were six furnaces at Dudley Wood, hut there were only five of them which had been worked. To his mind it was clear that the representa tions contained in these papers did not refer to any particular time, but were merely the results of former workings. In the whole of them he did not find anything like an assertion that the calculations were made referring to any parti cular time ? To his mind it was perfectly clear that they were stated as the results from former experience. If such were the case with the P. T. Papers, how was it possible to suppose that the calculations contained in the D. Papers could have reference to any particular fortnight—to any par ticular time. There was nothing on the face of them, except their date, to show that they referred to any particular pe riod. On the other hand, the calculations were stated to have been made upon averages—not averages for a fortnight, but evidently from averages of times past. A question of much importance was, how the parties considered the Papers to have been calculated—whether upon the actual outlay, for the purpose of producing a certain quantity of pig irou_. or whether the calculations were intended to include the dead wo r k such as the opening of mines , &c. &e. The dead work might be very expensive, and the question was, upon what quantity of produce was it to be apportioned. From the extreme difficulty of apportioning such expense—from the _ . dmost WO impossibility of doing so, he felt bound to conaid the papers as intending merely to give an avenge of the p ast, end that they were not intended to include the dead w ht.eig 'hs seenduct of Mr. Attwood (luring the transaction did not give any signs df ecenseiousness of acting in any fraudulent manner- The books of the concern were always open to the Conipany'a inspection ; if those hooka had been able to slim the fa;sity of the statement, they would net have been open to the inepeetion of the Deputation at all times. A grave charge seize made against Mr. Attwood—it eas considered that he knew 'its hod made a good bargain because he so readily gave up 50,94)0/., of the purchase money, when it was fund that he had no power to renew on that part of the property held at will. It was to be remembered, how ever, that the original contract ..vas entered into in June, 182 5 , when everything was touch enhanced in value by the specula tions of so many Companies as were then formed, and that a very great, a very considerable change bad taken place all affairs by October in the same year, when he gave up tha i ! sum. That might be some reason for the facility with wilier' Attwood gave up the money. Philip Taylor and Mr llerrison were dots n at the works in October and November, while the original contract was pending. It did not very clearly appear for what purpose they were there ; it was, how ever, in evidence that they had access to the books dorieg the whole time, which did not appear. as if Mr. Attwood had any knowledge, of any fraud. The iN oble and Learned Lord proceeded to state that from certain calcu lotions which were in evidence, it was clear the Compaq. were availing themselves of opportunities they possessed of making inquiries, and dint their investigations were not eon fi6ed to a single quarter only, but extended to the general average, running over a long period. Now, as to the he dence of Mr. Brunton, and it might be remarked that th evidence offered on the part of the plaintiff was peculiarly va luable, Mr. Brunton stated that P. Taylor said the defendant had thrown open his books, ,which afforded a certain confirms tion of all he had before stated. On the 29 th October, 1825, the deputation was appointed, with regard to whic h it was hardly to he credited, as the plaintiff stated, that the deputa tion, which had been appointed to test the accuracy of Att wood's statements, that they trusted to his representation s, and did not inquire into the truth of the P. T. papers. Now, from a letter of Mr. Mills, 2d November, it appeared th the deputation examined the books, and inquired into the ac curacy of these papers. All this, indeed, would go for nothing if P. Taylor was to be considered as having con spired with Attwood ; but there was no proof of that. The report of the deputation stated that Attwood s oh* stantially proved the accuracy of the information on which the managing directors concluded the Con tract. It was not till the end of March follo wing that the first declaration of war was made by the Co m p any against Attwood. Now, upon the whole of the evidence, was it not clear—Firstly, That the calculations of the Corripae3l at were made on the average of a long period past, and not o n the actual expense of a particular period ? Secondly, That th e y did not rely solely on the information of Attwood, but that they had examined into it, and fully satisfied themselves of its accuracy. Thirdly, That with the full knowledge of thess e facts, they entered into the contract. As to the parole:test': mony. which had been adduced in opposition to the written evidence, it was not to be relied on with so much confi dence, and having satisfied himself that the parole te' ti mony could not be taken as throwing any doubt on f e lt the documentary evidence, he (the Lord Chancellor) ffa bound to say that he did not think the plaint,il had entitled themselves to the relief which they prayed. (the Lord Chancellor) was convinced that no fraud had been e s proved arising out of circumstances which were not know,' to the Company from the very commencement ; and he te, therefore submit to their Lordships that the result of this len,f and arduous investigation must be that the case must he .i missed with costs. Lord LreontiesT had listened with great attention to w h i at had fallen from his Noble and Learned Friends ; but . ee regretted to say that he had arrived at a different cell; elusion to that which they had come. He would not s i e his opinion in competition with that of his Noble Fricel g ; especially in a case on which he had himself decided. ne t , l l : o owed it to himself and to their LordslOps to state distinctlY 'd. grounds on which his difference of judgment was founde. There could be no dispute as to the law upon this question, he (Lord Lyndhurst) would thus take the liberty of statingi. that when representations false, and false to the knowfedogc.f, the party making them, were made with respectt ur nature of property which was to be the subjert ,ef `hose chase affecting the value of that property ir representations turned out afterwards to be inconsistent 1-14 the knowledge of the party making them, there wlar be a good foundation for an action at common law ha d recovering the damage sustained by the deceit whichset fling been practised, or in a Court of Equity, for the the contract. This law had been settled in cases both in King's Bench and the Rolls Court, before Sir detail Gratnbe The Noble and Learned Lord then proceeded facts of the case, remarking that he had thought it would. • by directing well to refer the case to the decision of a jury. ow -se an issue : but the Counsel were not favourable t) that courses perhaps from feeling that it was a ease too "11.nsP Noble and difficult for the investigation of a jury. f Friend on the Woolsack had spoken of the probability ot. ey case, he would most willingly put it upon that, for 11 0 ; were all one way. The paper I). 1. was the Pap er d which the whole case turned, and Mr. Attwood characterise that Paper as hypothetical. Was that so ? No, they had th e positive evidence of Mr. Harrison, who in the Court beloW t to be was treated as an honourable man. That gentleman stated the Paper bore actual reference to the time it was mad, his Noble friends had said that the papers did not represent the actual cost of making iron. Upon the evidence that took pie ce d in the Court below, lie thought that he was entitlea to say that: they did. What was the law, ‘r i a man withheld documents, as had' been done B ut why the law presumed every thing against him. Pllt l fc ' s , was said that this case was not to be decided uponeelinded rential evidence ; why the lives of individuals were d th a n upon such evidence, and that, too , far more slight o f the that in the present ease. The Noble Lord then re ad p art evidence of Best to show what took place at the tim e the clhte)ontill'id tion was at Congreaves, and remarked that no Mer l . sis i a n be surprised upon that evidence, that he had come to the dec... cis he had done, his wily surprise was that his Noble Fr l l: oa id had formed the judgment they had done. He ; I s he not set his judgment against those two Noble Lortas.e,veri, might be biased by a former impression, former body knewlhow difficult it was to get rid of riot pressions, bu still he could not but think he eves supposing that the statements made by Alf . te arlY wood were not founded in truth. It had been - fed. shown that iron could not be made at the price ot%ian From all the evidence in the cause he was clear l y of eP,lOOld that iron could not be made for less than 51. a ton, w hich e var a g make a difference from the statement of Mr. Attwood of tip' t he of 18,0001. There was no doubt in his mi nd that.ico_ yields had been falsely stated. To that it was said, ne piaci book existed; if there did not, stock-papers were IceP t ' f ro nt anything been done by the Company to prevent till t ios coming to a Court of Equity to complain ° tair dy manner in which they had been treated ? Ccryfeeer, not. With respect to Philip Taylor, 11° these it was to be said, indeed, that previous to ci y et transactions, Mr. Attwood knew nothing of him, B , n Was shortly afterwards Mr. Attwood advanced him 12,000Toler, it likely under those circumstances that Philip tbiral as the Agent of the Company, wou l d do anY air. in the negotiations that were going on detrimental r e far , Attwood ? How WS this sum advanced Why t e l o oo/ niture Corogreays WAS made over to him' for s 'rity• for which his note e' s were taken without any pe rt ain Again, 0,000/. was advanced to enable him to retain' able shares, and in another instance money was advanced to / 01 Mr. Taylor to manufacture boilers on his own premises , „ l ilt this being kept secret, created great suspicion. Then el",j, look at Edwards, who had been a servant of Atoc°- Ile, through the interest of Mr. Attwood, was niadtchsat('? countant ;to the concern. Was there nothing in that It was said that estimates were made that were a so denied by the evidence of Talbot. The works yi eld e .0 5 much less than was expected, that a deputation cod sent from London to Crongrcaves, when it was disc °V t ;,en that the Company had been grossly imposed upon. an d a t ben it was thst the present Bill was filed. The Noble Ler wade went at some length into the nature of the objectiou.,a,i,s to the formation of the record, by having made . 1 , re . and other parties, but denied that he was at fault W. the sped to that. There was some parts of the conduct rove Court of Directors of the Company[; lie could not ;Pr n ot but still that was no reason why they ghoul,' d on have redress. Hte e had now said all he inten,u.icraself the care, and what he had said was to do jus tice "co On the suggestion of Lord BROUGHAM the further deration of the case was adjourned to Monday. t 10 4 FIRE ON CLAPHAM COMMON.--Las- e ) (Aar about eight o'clock the furze on the north-east part 0 ' - c i to ham Common, near the road to Balham-hill, was disecverstis bc on fire. One of the engines of the London Fife„Arieri blishment soon arrived, but neither the efforts of the and or those who lived in the neighbourhood, and who endear° ,05, to extinguish the flames by thrashing succeeded in stopping its progress. After burning, lictegra the furze with long :er., with great fury for neatly three quarters of an hou r ' * - jher dually lost its strenr.tth, any communication with the s e , part of the Common being impeded by the cross rosels',,„kett veral opinions were expressed as to its origin ; it having.".'d - ti als out in different places at the same time, some i'i cllll that suppose it was the work of a prar. tikel incendiary ; otberfinoor it arose from spontaneous ignition ; and others that th e 400 or • t neighbourhood, who are not allowed to cut the ' fuel, were the cause of it. T z r l of A grand dinner was given yesterday by the ''''' a a t- Durham at his residence in Cle;eland-row, which “w as A, tended by Prince Esterhazy, Count Puzzo di ' Borg° , 14r. a rid Stevenson Lords Melbourne, Lansdowne, Palmerston' ever y J. Russell; Sir J. Elohhouse ; Dukes of Norfolk, De*. shire, and Cleveland ; Earl Grey, Lord Hll, Si ' t : .1. loughby Gordon, Messrs. liedworth Lambon, Ellic e ' . Stanley, &c. Sze. TIIE WEATHER p Tuesday .—U to last e riffe l and while the Queensberry were still partially covered with snow, vil'i Cumberland mountains on the preceding day were bite hod'' they have been during the whole season. 131 ° 11 g bing A cl ° ,ll a goo.- . ever, goes forward in the valleys, and every day is done by teams that were never in better fettle. In the p a d rish of Kirkmahoe, and still nearer home, beans were planted a short time ago ; and we could even name cases in which the grain seedsman has been busy with the harrows at his 1 1 ... e ; fishing ha s oec e Although our river is now open for salmon, prevented by continued spates and cold ; green, and suspect will be done until the distant hills are again and little good i the " stiaw broo" they engender finally swept away: Lastet night it commenced raining so heavily, that we may OP another flood.—Dumfries Courier. , . 1 THE stf .( lq, LiiNDO.N, 141111'. .S ij AY , M Alibi! lE_: